It doesn't matter much right now but waving the magic wand of forensic evidence to win cases might have a rough future. At some point an intrepid defender is going to put up a serious fight against Good Old Boy #1 giving an all day seminar to Good Old Boy #2 and than having Good Old Boy #2 testify and send someone to jail for life in an arson investigation.

More scientific evidence could fall if a judge allows evidence of the potential weakness of the more "scientific" types of evidence like hair, fiber or footprint evidence. A good defender just need one juror who hates bullshit to hang the jury.